Leave a comment

neil_exile November 14 2006, 18:32:45 UTC
I'm disappointed - I think we're going to miss his experience, and can't really expect all of Cook, Bell & Collingwood to reach the level we need. It also helps swing things in favour of Giles rather than Panesar, which will be a backwards step.

Reply

phoenixandy November 14 2006, 19:21:53 UTC
Well, aside from the missing experience, I don't think we're losing a lot ( ... )

Reply

teut November 15 2006, 10:41:10 UTC
I don't understand the decision to give the gloves back to Jones. What has Chris Read done wrong? What has Jones done right?

The Giles/Panesar debate is less clearcut. A reasonable argument can be made to play Giles ahead of Panesar in Australia. Any chance of Ed Joyce actually opening in the first test?

Reply

phoenixandy November 15 2006, 12:47:22 UTC
My only guess on teh Read/Jones issue is that Fletch has decided that Jones is the better batsman, and keeping ability is irrelevant, as long as you can hold the ball ( ... )

Reply

sarabian November 15 2006, 21:31:00 UTC
I'm sort of disappointed on the Jones/Read front too.

My thought has always been that the effect of an extra 30-50 runs is no good if the opposition has put on an extra 50-100 runs from wk mistakes.

Maybe it will be Jones/Monty or Read/Giles in which case I'd then take the former, but to really attack the aussies I'd like to see Read/Monty

Shame about Marcus on a personal level, but it is more of a problem of us being short of proper backup if someone gets injured.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up